Hypothetical Question
- Thread starter drache
- Start date
Hypothetically,
I wouldn't bother. I'd wait longer, save up and get a decent scope. It's better to buy it once. Buying a cheap scope, is a lot like getting a super computer, and then buying the cheapest, smallest and crapiest monitor you can find. You can't cheap out on the part of the rifle that you interface the most with. Looking through good glass makes it a lot more enjoyable. Also having the shots go where you aim, and not wondering "is it the scope"? Pays for itself.
I wouldn't bother. I'd wait longer, save up and get a decent scope. It's better to buy it once. Buying a cheap scope, is a lot like getting a super computer, and then buying the cheapest, smallest and crapiest monitor you can find. You can't cheap out on the part of the rifle that you interface the most with. Looking through good glass makes it a lot more enjoyable. Also having the shots go where you aim, and not wondering "is it the scope"? Pays for itself.
Last edited:
That is good advice except if the scope will be going onto a $200 rimfire there is not reason to put a $400+ scope on top of it.
A couple of things here. It doesn't matter what the rifle was worth. The rifle is almost the cheapest part of the equation here. By the time you add up ammo costs, bases, rings and a scope the initial cost of the rifle isn't the most significant part. In fact it's pretty easy to justify not buying a cheap rifle, due to this. Now if the rifle is a shooter, and decent quality or just your favourite hunting rig it may be worth it. I have a number of rifles where the scope cost significantly exceeded the cost of the rifle. The general rule is you'll spend as much on the scope as the rifle. Now with that said:
In your case look in the EE.
The two suggestions due to cost/performance that I would make are the Burris Fullfield II 3-9x and the Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x.
With the fullfield you get better glass than the 3200 and in my opinion a better reticle with the ballistic plex. But it's a centerfire scope so the parallax is set at 100 yards. For target shooting at 25 yards, this is a pain. You can do it, but it's not optimal.
The Bushnell 3200 has parallax adjustment from 10 yards to Infinity. The glass isn't as good as the Fullfield, and I'm not a fan of their reticle choices but it's better suited for a rimfire.
These are two good choices. I'd probably go with the Bushnell. There's one right now for $210 in the EE. You might be able to do better or bargain the price down a bit. Ultimately up your price level by $50 and it will make a world of difference towards the optics you can buy. You don't need to buy a $400 scope but you'll need to be at the $200 for a second hand scope to get something that isn't crap.
In your case look in the EE.
The two suggestions due to cost/performance that I would make are the Burris Fullfield II 3-9x and the Bushnell Elite 3200 3-9x.
With the fullfield you get better glass than the 3200 and in my opinion a better reticle with the ballistic plex. But it's a centerfire scope so the parallax is set at 100 yards. For target shooting at 25 yards, this is a pain. You can do it, but it's not optimal.
The Bushnell 3200 has parallax adjustment from 10 yards to Infinity. The glass isn't as good as the Fullfield, and I'm not a fan of their reticle choices but it's better suited for a rimfire.
These are two good choices. I'd probably go with the Bushnell. There's one right now for $210 in the EE. You might be able to do better or bargain the price down a bit. Ultimately up your price level by $50 and it will make a world of difference towards the optics you can buy. You don't need to buy a $400 scope but you'll need to be at the $200 for a second hand scope to get something that isn't crap.
Some of the older Bushnell, made in Japan scopes, are very good for money, as long as you stick to lower power magnifications. You should be able to pick one up for less than $150, the problem is finding one.
Other than that, spend MORE than $200 and get something half decent, as above, a Bushnell 3200 with an AO is a good choice. Or go with a fixed power 6x scope.
Other than that, spend MORE than $200 and get something half decent, as above, a Bushnell 3200 with an AO is a good choice. Or go with a fixed power 6x scope.
to answer your actual question
You could go with a Bushnell Banner 4-12x40 AO or for a bit more than the top end of your budget, you could grab a Bushnell Trophy 4-12x40 AO. Both are more than enough scope for your rimfire and I'm sure you would be happy with either. I just bought a 5-15x40 AO Bushnell Legend for my new .17HMR. Very impressed with this scope. I paid $246 at P&D's in Edmonton and I think the 4-12 is about $10-20 less. I really wanted the Trophy but the 4-12 with a duplex reticle was out of stock. The Trophy is a fair bit shorter and more compact than the Legend so is ideal for a rimfire IMO.
Good luck, let us know what you end up with.
Bassman
You could go with a Bushnell Banner 4-12x40 AO or for a bit more than the top end of your budget, you could grab a Bushnell Trophy 4-12x40 AO. Both are more than enough scope for your rimfire and I'm sure you would be happy with either. I just bought a 5-15x40 AO Bushnell Legend for my new .17HMR. Very impressed with this scope. I paid $246 at P&D's in Edmonton and I think the 4-12 is about $10-20 less. I really wanted the Trophy but the 4-12 with a duplex reticle was out of stock. The Trophy is a fair bit shorter and more compact than the Legend so is ideal for a rimfire IMO.
Good luck, let us know what you end up with.
Bassman
Last edited:
That is good advice except if the scope will be going onto a $200 rimfire there is not reason to put a $400+ scope on top of it.
Why not?
The scope is actually at least as an important part of the system as the rifle. I have a number of rifles with scopes on them that cost more than the rifle.
Ted
I won't put a scope on a rimfire that I wouldn't put on a centerfire.
Rimfire only scopes are generally lower quality than the centerfire ones, and you don't have the option of putting the scope on a centerfire later on. Plus if you go to sell it, you've limited your market with a rimfire scope. I personally stay away from "rimfire" scopes.
Rimfire only scopes are generally lower quality than the centerfire ones, and you don't have the option of putting the scope on a centerfire later on. Plus if you go to sell it, you've limited your market with a rimfire scope. I personally stay away from "rimfire" scopes.
PerversPépère
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Shawinigan (Quebec)
For a .22, try to find a little RWS/Diana air rifle scope. They have parallax correction down to about 10 feet and are very well made.
PP.
PP.
cdnredneck_t3
Regular
That is good advice except if the scope will be going onto a $200 rimfire there is not reason to put a $400+ scope on top of it.
I remember seeing a thread you started a while back on the tasco scope. The consensus seems to be the same on both threads that you get what you pay for. I have a question for you. How many rounds do you plan on putting threw your .22? 5 or 10 thousand plus sounds about right for the life of a decent 22. I would rather use a scope that is a joy to use over a cheap one that picks up glare from the sun, does not hold zero and usually come with $hitty rings that you may not even get to zero in the first place. I used to use Tasco and Bushnell rim fire stuff and got fed up with it and now run Elite 4200’s in Leupold rings on top of my CZ 452’s. You don’t have to go into that price range but I would say go a step up from a $150 scope.
